In message <E9DD9378-1DAE-4077-A0C6-149DBAC0C49F at digitalmarbles.com>, Ricardo N
ewbery writes:
>>On Jan 28, 2009, at 4:19 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>>> In message <768C2A99-6D24-4D6F-
>>B324-25E13CFBE0F7 at digitalmarbles.com>, Ricardo N
>> ewbery writes:
>>> Cool... so why do you figure that backwards compatibility is not
>>> possible? If my old purge scripts now start "purging" rather than
>>> "banning", why should anything break?
>>>> Purge wouldn't be a CLI command
>>Ah, okay... why not?
Because you don't have a cached object at hand to purge, all you can
do from the CLI is to add bans that will deal with the objects when
they are found in the cache later on.
Your question is -exactly- why I want the rename: purge sounds like
something happens to the object right now, and that is not possible
from the CLI context.
--
Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk at FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.